Thrashers

By caillou

December 16, 2005 04:08 PM | Link to this

They need 9 of 12, puts them at .500 for the year. They really need to win the next three, because after that they have Montreal, Philly and Buffalo, and I can’t see them winning more than one of those outright.

By Thrashy Thrashy

December 16, 2005 04:12 PM | Link to this

If they play defense like they did last night, the Thrashers will make the playoffs. The game should’ve been a shutout, but the Devils apparently found Garnett’s weakness: the back of his head. I guess Napoleon Dynamite is a good target.

By Mick

December 16, 2005 04:39 PM | Link to this

Well if you look at it realisticly, we need all 12. Because even if we make the top 16, we need to stay in the top 16. While being .500 and over helps moral, it doesn’t show on the standings.

With our last 6 games, it will be difficult to call. Florida and Washington would hopefully be guarenteed wins, assuming we don’t collapse all of a sudden.

Jersey, well it will be a close one again, but I think we can pull out a win again.

Montreal, lets face it, we’ve never had much luck with these guys. I don’t see us winning it. Our D would need to step up big time.

Philly…will be another close one I think. With many of Philly’s players out, we have a shot, but we still need a supreme effort.

Buffalo…while they are surging, Biron is a lazy goalie when he plays the puck, so if the guys can capitalize on that then we have a shot.

While our D was pretty solid (for the most part) against Jersey, they need to stick with it and still improve on it. They just need to help out Garny and we’ll be fine. We have nothing to worry about in Garny, hes doing better than most professional goalies are!

Lets hope our D strengthens up and keeps doing those little things right.

By John Crawford

December 16, 2005 04:52 PM | Link to this

Get half of the available points, and here come the goalies in January…

By Bob

December 16, 2005 04:58 PM | Link to this

They need 7 out of 12. And it starts with the next two games, need these 4 points

By rba

December 16, 2005 05:15 PM | Link to this

How many they need? They need all 12. How many can they realistically get? I do not know. This team is unpredictable, especially after yesterday’s game. If they play like they played against Devils, they’ll get all 12.

By RomansFriendBill

December 16, 2005 05:21 PM | Link to this

Minimum 9 out of 12 points. They are behind the eight ball and can’t afford to play .500 ball for any stretch.

By kracker

December 16, 2005 05:39 PM | Link to this

Thrash now have a modest 4 game points streak. Maintain that and they will be OK.

The remaining 6 games are 4 home & 2 away. A contending team in need of points should expect of themseves a point streak yielding 9-10 points for those games. Failing that, get 8 points any way they can.

9 more points by New Years would total 39 points in 39 games. Not good enough but still in the playoff chase. Bottom line, Thrash must play above .500 for every two week period.

By Brendan

December 16, 2005 05:46 PM | Link to this

Where’s Russ? He always has this calculated to the Nth degree.

I’m gonna say they need nine (9) points.

But is this team a playoff team?

While I wish the Thrashers the best of luck, and would LOVE TO SEE some PLAYOFF hockey at Philips, the WORST POSSIBLE OUTCOME of this season would be a futile run at the playoffs that comes up just short.

All that does is screw our draft order.

Now if Lehts and Dunham come back, and this team actually does blaze a path through the league, then they’ll easily make the playoffs, as one of the best teams in the league.

Raise your hand if you think this is one of the best teams in the league.

By Russ

December 16, 2005 06:07 PM | Link to this

Brendan, I’m glad you have noticed my statistical breakdowns. I have always been looking at the same number, 90 points to get into the playoffs. The players need to concentrate on one game at a time, but as fans we can afford to look ahead to see what is needed. I won’t take a guess on how many points are needed out of the next six games, but I am looking at a 30-19 record the rest of the way to get to 90 points. This is not impossible, but still very tough. I am encouraged that there has finally seemed to be a consistent effort over the last 5 or 6 games. Earlier in the season it seemed like the team would come out very flat after each win. The goalies coming back will be a big boost (if they can stay healthy).

By Brendan

December 16, 2005 06:23 PM | Link to this

I knew I could count on you, Russ. And I’m glad someone is still tracking that. Good job!

By Brendan

December 16, 2005 06:26 PM | Link to this

The following excerpt appeared in the Tuesday, November 8, 2005, edition of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

“The owners resisted preseason predictions for the youthful Hawks, but had openly predicted a playoff berth for the Thrashers. ‘I am concerned,’ [Bruce] Levenson said of the Thrashers’ poor start. ‘But … I think we have a terrific team, and I think we have a terrific coach, and I think that helps alleviate a certain amount of the concern and a lot of the anxiety one might expect if you sit back and think ‘God, they spend all this money, have all these expectations, and it doesn’t appear to be working in the first go-round.’ [He continues] ‘I still think [The Thrashers] are going to be a really good team. If we’re having this conversation six weeks from now, you’d probably hear a stronger word from me than ‘concerned.’�

The article ends with this juicy nugget.

“I think [Waddell and Knight] both know that the responsibility falls on them,� Levenson said, “and I think they both know that if it doesn’t work, they’ll have a price to pay for that.�

Again, that’s taken directly from the AJC’s Tuesday, November 8, 2005 Sports Section. The article is called, “‘Our little soap opera’ almost over.� Page C3’s header is: “Spirit: Now, partners seeking shared ‘vision.’�

The author is Tim Tucker, of the AJC.

On 11-08-05, the Thrashers record was 4-9-1, or five games under .500. Their next game was against Pittsburgh. The Thrashers won that game, 5-0, in a statement-making game versus the Penguins, who had earlier embarrassed them with a 7-5 win, where Atlanta squandered a 4-0 first period lead.

Looking at the calendar, that means Tuesday, December 20, 2005, is six (6) weeks from the date of that quote by Levenson.

Atlanta’s record, as of December 16, 2005, is 13-16-4, or three games under .500.

There are two games before December 20, 2005, both home games, vs. Florida and Washington.

If the Thrashers LOSE both those games, they will, once AGAIN, be five (5) games under .500, with a record of 13-18-4.

Said another way, they would be precisely where they were when Bruce Levensen said he would be more than “concerned� about this team six weeks from now. Again, he uttered that on November 8, 2005.

Is the pressure on?? Or was Levenson blowin’ smoke?

In case you’re wondering, Florida and Washington haven’t been tearin’ up the league this year. Which means, these are “winnable games� for the Thrashers.

They’re not looking at Philly, followed by Ottawa, next up on the schedule.

What will happen if the Thrashers lose these two games?

Nothing? Or will someone get fired?

By Ryan

December 16, 2005 07:41 PM | Link to this

Some tough games coming up. Out of those games I would be happy with 6-8 points but with how some of the other teams are playing ahead of us in the playoff standings I think we need all 12. Its alot, but it would truly make things better for the Thrashers.

By Mick

December 16, 2005 07:56 PM | Link to this

Now thats a juicy piece of reading there Brendan, thanks for that! Though I doubt anyone will be fired. Then again, we could see something happen, where the owners look at what Pittsburg has done by firing Eddie, and maybe take a page out of their book, who knows.

Though another good point was made about making the playoffs. Even IF we make it, we might still lose in the first round, and then, as Brendan pointed out, we miss out on the draft. While we don’t want to be the worst in the league just to get 1st pick or whatever, we don’t want to end up in the middle and end up missing out on something.

Thanks for those excerpts Brendan, those are something to bake your noodle over.

By Brendan

December 16, 2005 11:24 PM | Link to this

I do what I can to contribute, Mick. I hope the Thrashers keep this streak alive. It would give Lehtonen a “fighting chance” to get us to the playoffs.

If we don’t make the playoffs, I’ll be disappointed, but the year will not have been a total flop if we can land a Top Five pick.

The team that finishes LAST in the regular season must win the draft lottery to get the top pick in the draft.

In 2004, Washington won the draft lottery without having the worst record. They selected Alexander Ovechkin.

In 2001, when Atlanta won the draft lottery and selected Kovalchuk, the Thrashers did not have the worst regular season record. The NY Islanders did. And Tampa Bay had the next worst record. Atlanta was third from the bottom. Getting Kovalchuk was a steal, thanks to winning the lottery.

If Marc Savard is dealt at the trade deadline, or offseason, I’m going to be furious. Especially if the cap actually increases.

Good GM’s find a way to get their players signed. To ship a player who is contributing in a meaningful way … just doesn’t make any sense. So, we’ll see what happens.

By TonyC

December 17, 2005 01:42 AM | Link to this

trading Savard would really stink. He’s very much the play-making center the team needs. While it’d be nice to have Forsberg, there’s only one of him (and he gets hurt more than even Savard). If they decide to trade Savard we’d better get PLENTY back. But I don’t think that will happen.

I wonder why so many people seem to think that Lehtnoen(spl?) will be Roy-good immediately upon his return? I mean they’re talking about changing his stance so as to not put so much pressure on his groin. This isn’t a good sign folks. it’s like getting a baseball pitcher to change his delivery; the adjustment in and of itself is minor but it affects every other aspect of his game. While I’ve seen the kid in person, and I do believe he’s got the potential to be Roy-good, I don’t think it’s going to be anytime before say late Jan. before we see him close to that sort of level. The guy hasn’t even played any tune-up AHL games!!!!

But hey, the beat the Deadwings and the Devils in dramatic fashion in back-to-back games. This can only inspire more confidence in the boys, and I do believe it’s possible for them to make some hay here at the end of 2005.

By TonyC

December 17, 2005 01:43 AM | Link to this

should read “…they beat the Deadwings…”

By Bob

December 17, 2005 10:17 AM | Link to this

Tony, I hadn’t heard they are trying to change Lehtonen’s stance to compensate for the injury. That means it’s a chronic injury. If he has to relearn a new technique, you’re right, that will be a long process.

By TonyC

December 17, 2005 11:18 AM | Link to this

Bob- Yes it is a chronic injury, one that he suffered as young teenager, that was kept hidden from most scouts and one th DW and crew said they had no knowledge of…..I’m inclined to believe that they didn’t know. I’m also inclined to think that if I’m going to use my #1 pick on a guy, I’d at least try and find out if the guy was the class clown or the smelly kid who ate the gluein 1st grade! Let’s not get me started on DW. But yeah Bob they are working on his stance, getting him to be more stand-up than the “normal” butterfly style. All in all it sounds like to me that we need to give ol’ Doc Andrews in birmingham a call and see if he’s got anything for core groin tendons…..if not for Lehtnoen(spl?), then for every other goalie we’ve had….I’m tellin ya I half expect to hear Berkhoel tore his groin!

By thrashersfan

December 17, 2005 03:04 PM | Link to this

I hope this news, or rumor, isn’t true regarding Lehtonen. How many professional athletes successfully change the way they’ve played since say their teenage yrs. I can only hope that since he’s still young he can do it. We all know what Tiger did but that’s Tiger, one in a generation player! I have to believe goalies move somewhat instinctively, although honestly guys I don’t know anything about the technicalities of goaltending. If Lehtonen’s injury was chronic and kept from DW & staff, so be it, but even knowing about injuries may not have kept DW from drafting him. Remember, he also drafted Stefan, who has never lived up to his #1 overall pick status, even when DW knew Stefan’s history of concussions and whose agent refused to release his medical file. I understood that yr’s depth chart in the draft was relatively weak, but certainly numbers 2 - 5 couldn’t have been worse! I know someone here will help me out with that point and I hope I’m proven wrong.

By BarryJ

December 17, 2005 03:30 PM | Link to this

Pre-existing injury…Well, isn’t that just GREAT news in the figurative joke otherwise known as “Blueland”?

I’m still WAITING for “Lehts” to justify the significant investment the organization has made in him—Heck, all I’ve heard is “Just you wait until he comes up, You’ll see!!!”…Well, I’ve been hearing that tripe for how many years now?

And to think that we could have had Rick Nash in uniform and playing for several years now…Well, isnt’ that just GREAT news, “Bluelanders”? (Oh, and for those who don’t know who he is, he has already appeared in the All-Star game and shared the Richard trophy for scoring)…

Anyone who criticizes this should take a step back and impress us all with their acumen concerning “Lehts”, who has done relatively nothing—for the PRO club—since being drafted (Sorry, I just can’t get excited about minor league achievements)…

At the time, a European goalie had never been drafted that high before…Well, I guess the lesson for the day, “Bluelanders”, is that there is oftentime a reason for such a remarkable historical fact…But, don’t forget, our fearless and incompetent leader, Don Waddell, “got the player he wanted all along”.

Well, Don, I wanted Rick Nash…But, then again, You’re the “expert”…Uh-huh.

Welcome to “Blueland”, ya’ll…a place where the word “accountability” does not exist…

By Bob

December 17, 2005 03:59 PM | Link to this

That is horrible news about Lehtonen. Manasso, can you do a piece on this?

Lehtonen was the one hope I had for this team.

By Brendan

December 17, 2005 07:16 PM | Link to this

Lehtonen, it was reported, “may have re-aggravated a 10-year old injury.” I read that about a month ago. I can’t remember if it was the AJC or ESPN.com. If it’s true, it’s a discouraging sign. But, I think Kari could still overcome this injury.

But BarryJ has an outstanding point: Don Waddell bought himself some time, with the Lehtonen ace up his sleeve.

“Just you wait.” Hey, I understand that goaltenders take time to develop. That’s why I would be extremely hesitant to take one with a 1st round pick. My philosophy is to use the Draft to “build the team in front of the goaltender,” then go PAY A PREMIUM for a proven commodity.

I fail to see why the Thrashers had to incur all the time and risk for Lehtonen, when Cujo, Belfour, Khabibulin, Hasek and others were all available free agents around the 2002 time-frame. Or soon thereafter. I don’t want to quibble over minor details, when the “overall concept” of obtaining an extremely VISIBLE free agent goaltender was the point of the comment.

Atlanta certainly would have done well to take Rick Nash, even with all his injuries.

Imagine Heatley, Nash, and Kovalchuk as a line! How did that NOT MATERIALIZE in Atlanta?

Even Bouwmeester wouldn’t have been a BAD pick. But Florida made it clear he would be THEIRS, “no matter what.”

Likewise, Columbus tipped its hand that its intended target was Rick Nash. How and why we didn’t extort 2003’s first round pick from either Florida or Columbus, I’ll never know.

Do not say, “So we could have Kozlov.” Kozlov was a separate deal with Buffalo. And the additional draft pick that came with him, was traded away. When the Sabres traded Hasek to Detroit, Buffalo got Detroits 2002, 30th overall pick. Buffalo traded that to Columbus, who traded it to Florida, who gave it to Atlanta as “inducement” not to pick Bouwmeester.

Jim Slater and Slava Kozlov are separate situations.

I’m sorry, we were talking about Lehtonen. I think it was BarryJ who advanced the notion that Waddell’s future is tied to him. That just might be true.

By sodapants

December 17, 2005 10:24 PM | Link to this

Here’s my impression of Barry…

“WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA”

Please just shut up you teet svcking, serial whiner… geezus….

If anyone was wondering who wears the dress on this board. It’s barry…

“I want this.. I wanted that.. Don?? You’re the “expert”.!!” blah blah blah… You’re worse than a 7 year old girl, barry… and not as tough. lol

MY GOD! Listening to you is like getting an education in what fingernails do to chalkboards. You’re a pro, no doubt… but you’re still a candy-striping skirt…..

By sodapants

December 17, 2005 10:27 PM | Link to this

who wants to bet that if barry owns a dog…. it got kicked tonight because we extended the winning streak to 4…???

lol